Raise the voting age!

[Dave Plowman (News]

Any country in the EU can make its own choice about what drugs to approve in an emergency like this.

But don't let that stop you trying to convince yourself it is only down to the EU.

[Dave Plowman (News]

And sweatshop UK is going to improve wages?

[Fredxx]

It became sweatshop UK when in the EU. You've been sheltered from the labour market from being retired. The first thing that happened after the vote was wages went up.

If it wasn't for Covid with the exodus of Eastern European immigrant workers and lack of workers as claimed by remainers, farm labourers etc, wages could only go up.

[Fredxx]

Norway is an exception.

Please let us know the revenue from Statoil (state owned company), petroleum taxes and how much that equates to each citizen. In fact so much that the government has a surplus.

I'll even help you:

And that is without personal wealth.

Venezuela is a basket case, but most of that is from sanctions.

[Fredxx]

You seem in utter denial that there might be more reasons to their decision. I was what you might call a floating vote and yet you still seem to misunderstand why floating voters might vote in the way they did.

I can add one further reason to the number I posted recently, simply that remainers who still bleat on about losing are not a pleasant crowd. Good example is various Lib Dems politician and councillor who used to post her abusing those who didn't share their same policy. Your post dismisses why the majority of 'floating' electorate voted for Brexit.

Regarding certainty, there is no certainty. No economist has reliably predicted the economy. What many voters wanted was a change from the relentless promises from politicians they will build more houses and the likes of David Cameron promising immigration down to 30,000 per year.

Despite saying this I'm sure you will dismiss and forget these posts and in a few months you will say, "All I ever heard was airy fairy 'bring back control' and 'sovereignty' etc. And of course saving on the EU membership fees", which will once again be a lie.

[T i m]

<snip>

I really do think most you decided to vote leave did so within seconds of being given the option, not because of the facts but because they didn't like what they had ('all these foreigners taking our jobs and houses') but without any real clue / understanding of the bigger picture, what it might *actually* cost all off us, in all sorts of ways by leaving.

Therefore, noting that came up after the opportunity to jump to a decision affected their thoughts, they just wanted to leave *because* and (as we have said all along), didn't really feel they needed to explain why ... 'that's democracy' etc.

I would imagine few people who voted to remain did so because they were so *convinced* that leaving would be best for 'most people' [1], so voted to remain as a counter vote to leaving. Many of the rest of us wouldn't be dragged into the folly of making such an important decision based on so few facts and so much personal prejudices / bias / bigotry.

So those fishermen that were protesting at Westminster were Scottish, and so they were likely to be even less happy that they were dragged out of the EU, putting their jobs and livelihoods in jeopardy for no (as yet presented or accepted), 'good reason'.

Cheers, T i m

[1] Or more likely, themselves and their closed minded attitudes.

[Fredxx]

You really don't have a clue why the floating voter might have voted for Brexit.

[Dave Plowman (News]

Not so. The vast majority - including me - vote for their own self interests. And many who claim they vote for the good of the country are simply lying. Or just deluded.

Because they were persuaded to do so by the press they read and the glib tongued likes of Farage. Which was mainly lies, half truths and predictions stated as facts.

Ah - right. You could try actually reading my post.

And do you honestly think damaging the economy of the country is going to get more houses built? But it very likely will cut down on immigration. I doubt any Pakistani wants to come to a country with no work.

Thanks for proving me right. Yet again no tangible benefits given of why we should have left the EU.

[Dave Plowman (News]

There was a good reason. The vast majority of fishing communities voted leave. On the basis they would get all 'their' fish back. But obviously didn't think what they were going to do with it. Even those whose main market was the EU. They believed the lies that selling to the EU would continue as usual. Ie, have their cake and eat it.

It's easily explained. They'd been told by all how stupid foreigners are. And believed it. The English the only clever people in the world. So we could easily put one over on the EU and come out smiling. After all, we won the war.

[Dave Plowman (News]

I very much doubt many did in depth research before making up their minds.

When change is being offered, it is very easy to make claims about how that change will benefit you. With the status quo, all you can do is defend it.

And there are countless examples of when changes are made purely for the sake of change, they end up making things worse.

[T i m]

<snip>

Quite, and even if they did, what facts (and more specifically 'actual benefits') could they have determined about their futures out of the EU by doing so?

Or question why you would want to move away from it.

Yup, but some people are just gamblers and will put their rent and family food money on a 'dead cert' as s/told to them by someone down the pub.

In general, these people don't have feelings ... as it's feelings (compassion / empathy / benevolence) that allow them to *also* consider the 'what if' stuff and not jump into something without 'good reason'.

Cheers, T i m

[Max Demian]

With a URL like that, there's no need to read it, eh?

[Fredxx]

<snip>

Yep, typical fanatic remainer who knows how everyone thinks, especially those with opposing views.

You are utterly myopic.

[Dave Plowman (News]

Err, you are lumping everyone together too. Don't you see that?

[Fred]

So did the UK.

It was in fact changed by revolution too.

That?s very arguable given that the monarchy returned.

But could easily not have.

[Fred]

An important change like that isnt just about you or those less fortunate.

That's a lie. You were also told that the UK would be free to import whatever it liked from the rest of the world tariff free if it chose to do that and that would certainly benefit those less fortunate with cheaper food and grog and stuff like that.

But those who bother to vote do control who does.

But the govt does now.

It isnt about always.

Corse that was never true of remainers, eh ?

But it turns out that it isnt a disaster.

And regardless, the majority who bothered to vote voted to leave and you get to like that or lump it.

[Fred]

Stopping the dregs of the EU from moving to the UK may well do.

[Fred]

Nope, scandinavian living standards are amongst the highest too.

And the reason for that is because they got the govt to do that stuff, socialism.

And there are plenty of failed capitalist economies too. And some that worked very well like HongKong before it was handed back to china.

[Fred]

You don?t know that with the majority claim.

Easy to claim.

Most don?t read any press anymore.

Corse there were never any glib tongues remainers, eh ?

Just as true of you and the remain campaign with claims that brexit would guarantee economic disaster, all planes would stop flying, no one would be able to holiday in the EU again etc.

You havent established that it will be damaged.

Fewer will need to be built with fewer EUians showing up.

There will always be plenty of work.

You are lying, again.

[Fredxx]

You have completely missed the point, I can only assume deliberately. Norway's standard of living has been bolstered by oil revenue, something enjoyed by some Middle Eastern countries.

No, because of oil revenue. Although wages are high in socialist countries, typically so is the cost of living.